Delhi Court March 2015 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Ajay Kumar Bhardwaj Vs. Dtc and Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-03-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on: March 3, 2015 + % W.P.(C) No.7577/2012 AJAY KUMAR BHARDWAJ ..... Petitioner Through: Dr. L.S. Chaudhary & Ms. Pratibha Gupta, Advs. versus DTC AND ORS Through: .....Respondents Mrs. Avnish Ahlawat, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH GAMBHIR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE I.S.MEHTA JUDGMENT I. S. MEHTA, J.1. Aggrieved from the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as Ld. CAT) dated 28.09.2012 in O.A. No.1167 of 2012, the petitioner has preferred the present writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside the aforesaid order and for issuing necessary directions to the respondent.2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner Sh. Ajay Kumar Bhardwaj was appointed at Delhi Transport Corporation (DTC) as Assistant Fitter on 11.04.1983. During the aforesaid employment of petitioner with respondent No.1 i.e. Delhi Transport Corp...
Shankar Singh Vs. Uoi and Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-03-2015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on: March 3, 2015 + % W.P.(C) No.6673/2003 SHANKAR SINGH Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. U. Srivastava, Adv. versus UOI & ORS .....Respondents Through: Mr. R.V. Sinha, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH GAMBHIR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE I.S.MEHTA JUDGMENT I. S. MEHTA, J.1. Aggrieved from the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi dated 23.07.2003 in O.A. No.2268/2002, the petitioner has preferred the present writ-petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside the aforesaid order and for issuing necessary directions to the respondent. The present writpetition is arising out of above-mentioned O.A. on the basis of the rejection of the petitioners representation dated 06.08.2001.2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner, an exserviceman/qualified draughtsman after release from the Army where he served for eighteen years, was appointed as draughtsman in...
Union of India and Ors Vs. K.T. Akhtar and Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-03-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on: March 03, 2015 + % W.P.(C) No.1371/2007 UNION OF INDIA & ORS Through: ..... Petitioners Mr. R.V. Sinha with Mr. R.N. Singh & Mr. Amit Sinha, Advs. versus K.T. AKHTAR & ORS Through: .....Respondents Mr. J.P. Sengh, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Yunus Malik, Mr Sumit Batra & Mr. Shashank Singh, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH GAMBHIR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE I.S.MEHTA JUDGMENT I. S. MEHTA, J.1. The present writ petition preferred by Union of India is arising out of O.A. No.532/2005, M.A. No.497/2005 wherein the Ld. Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as Ld. CAT) vide order dated 22.05.2006 allowed the O.A. and consequently Union of India was given direction to implement the same. Aggrieved from the above mentioned order, the petitioners preferred the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.2. The brief facts of the case are that the respondents were appoi...
Manish Kumar Vs. State (Nct of Delhi) and Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-03-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: March 03, 2015 + CRL.M.C. 344/2015 MANISH KUMAR Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. D. Verma, Advocate versus STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Ms. Nishi Jain, Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1State with SI Attar Singh Respondent No.2 in person CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR JUDGMENT (ORAL) % Quashing of FIR No.96/2013, under Sections 498-A/406/34 of the IPC, registered at police station Mayur Vihar, New Delhi is sought on the basis of mediated settlement of 30th March, 2013 (Annexure-B), arrived at Delhi Mediation Centre, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi. Notice. Ms. Nishi Jain, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1-State accepts notice and submits that respondent No.2, present in the Court, is complainant/first-informant of the FIR in question and she has been identified to be so by her counsel as well as by SI Attar Sing on the basis of identity proof produced by her. Learned...
Saleem Khatri Vs. Shafiquddin
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-03-2015
$~4 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + C.R.P. 14/2014 & CM No.2542/2014 Decided on:3. d March, 2015 % SALEEM KHATRI Through: . .... Petitioner Mr. R.S. Soni, Adv. versus SHAFIQUDDIN ..... Respondent Through: None. Coram: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA MUKTA GUPTA, J.(ORAL) 1. Despite service, none appears on behalf of the respondent. None appeared on behalf of respondent even on the last date of hearing. The petitioner is the defendant in the Civil Suit No.61/2012 filed by the respondent/Shafiquddin under Order 37 CPC for the recovery of an amount of `5,66,425/- based on a cheque. The case of the plaintiff/respondent in the plaint is that the plaintiff transferred a Slaughter House to the defendant in consideration whereof, the petitioner/defendant paid a sum of `4,62,425/- by way of a cheque which was dishonoured due to insufficient funds. The plaintiff/respondent sent a notice under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and thereafter filed a complaint before the Me...
Babita Jain Vs. Maya Garg
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-03-2015
$ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + RC.REV. 558/2012 % Decided on: BABITA JAIN Through:3. d March, 2015 ..... Petitioner Praveen Kumar Jain and Mr. Naveen Kumar Jain, Advocates. versus MAYA GARG Through: ..... Respondent Mr. Sharad Chandra and Mr. Sanjay Agarwal, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA MUKTA GUPTA, J (ORAL) 1. Aggrieved by the order dated 19th September, 2012 whereby the leave to defend application of the Respondent was allowed by the learned ARC in an eviction petition filed by the Petitioner under Section 14 (1) (e) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (in short the DRC Act) the Petitioner prefers the present petition.2. In the eviction petition, the Petitioner stated that the Petitioner along with the sister-in-law purchased the built up property bearing No.E-2/19, Jain Market, Shashtri Nagar, Delhi-110052 admeasuring 196 Sq. Yards vide registered Sale Deed dated 10th February, 2005. The first floor of the said property was being used by the Petit...
Lalita @ Lalita Sharma Vs. The Directorate of Education and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-03-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + % + W.P.(C) No.4858/2014& conn. 3rd March, 2015 W.P.(C) No.4858/2014 & CM No.9683/14 (Directions) LALITA @ LALITA SHARMA Through: versus ..... Petitioner Mr.Bhagbati Prasad Padhy, Advocate. THE DIRECTORATE OF EDUCATION & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Ms.Nikhita Khetrapal, Advocate for R- 1 & 2. Mr.Arun Mehta and Mr.Naveen Sharma, Advocates for R-3. + W.P.(C) No.5752/2014 & C.M.No.14185/2014 (Directions) BRIJ MOHAN Through: versus ..... Petitioner Mr.Bhagbati Prasad Padhy, Advocate. THE DIRECTORATE OF EDUCATION & ORS...... Respondents Through: Ms.Nikhita Khetrapal, Advocate for R- 1 & 2. MS.Purnima Maheshwari, Advocate for R-3. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) W.P.(C) No.4858/2014 1. It is not unknown that the indisciplined employees against whom departmental proceedings are commenced, misuse the judicial process to somehow or the other keep on delaying the department...
Arvind Madhok Vs. State of Nct of Delhi and Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-03-2015
$~28 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: March 03, 2015 + CRL.M.C. 3442/2014 ARVIND MADHOK Through: ..... Petitioner Ms. Sima Gulati, Advocate versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR .....Respondents Through: Mr. Navin Sharma, Additional Public Prosecutor for respondentState with Inspector Vikas Yadav and SI Bhagat Singh Mr. D.K. Rai, Advocate with respondent No.2 in person CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR JUDGMENT (ORAL) % Quashing of FIR No.300/1998 under Sections 420/468/471 of IPC registered at P.S. Hauz Khas, New Delhi is sought on the basis of Memorandum of Understanding 22nd May, 2014 (Annexure-B) and affidavit of respondent No.2. Mr. Navin Sharma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-State submits that respondent No.2, present in the Court, has been identified to be the complainant/first-informant of the FIR in question by his counsel as well as by SI Bhagat Singh on the basis of CRL.M.C. 3442/2014 Page 1 identity proof produced by him. Le...
Deepak Kumar and Ors. Vs. State and Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-03-2015
$~31 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: March 03, 2015 + CRL.M.C. 4366/2014 & Crl.M.A.14986/2014 DEEPAK KUMAR & ORS Through: ..... Petitioners Ms. Shilpa, Advocate versus STATE & ANR Through: .....Respondents Mr. Vinod Diwakar, Additional Public Prosecutor for respondentState with SI Babu Lal Respondent No.2 in person CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR JUDGMENT (ORAL) % Quashing of FIR No.43/2008, under Sections 406/34 of IPC and Sections 3 & 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 registered at police station R.K. Puram, Delhi is sought on the basis of affidavit of respondent No.2. Mr. Vinod Diwakar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-State submits that respondent No.2, present in the Court, has been identified to be complainant/first-informant of the FIR in question by SI Babu Lal on the basis of identity proof produced by him. Respondent No.2, present in the Court, submits that the dispute between the parties has been amicably resolved vide ...
Sunil Kumar@google Vs. The State (Nct of Delhi) and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-03-2015
$~33 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: March 03, 2015 + CRL.M.C. 5309/2014 SUNIL KUMAR @ GOOGLE ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Parivesh Singh, Mr. Surender Saran Kumar and Mr. Prrateek Gaupta, Advocates versus THE STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ORS .....Respondents Through: Mr. Navin Sharma, Additional Public Prosecutor for respondentState with SI Naresh Kumar Respondents No.2 & 3 in person CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR JUDGMENT (ORAL) % Quashing of FIR No.220/2013, under Sections 308/341 of IPC registered at police station Karol Bagh, Delhi is sought on the basis of affidavits of respondents No.2 & 3. Mr. Navin Sharma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-State, submits that respondent No.3, present in the Court, has been identified to be the complainant/first-informant and respondent No.2 has been identified to be the injured of the FIR in question by SI Naresh Kumar on the basis of identity proof produced by them. Learned CRL.M.C. 5309/2014 Pa...
- ‹ Prev
- 47
- 48
- 49
- 50
- 51
- 53
- 54
- 55
- 56
- 57
- Next ›
- Last »